ICBA comment letter regarding cra

Carla.Taylor

Description

July 30, 2009 Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary Attention: Comments Board of Governors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Federal Reserve System th550 17 Street, NW 20th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20429 Washington, DC 20551 Attention: RIN number 3064-AD45 Attention: Docket No. R -1360 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Regulation Comments, 250 E Street, SW, Mail Stop 2-3 Chief Counsel’s Office Washington, DC 20219 Office of Thrift Supervision Attention: Docket ID OCC-2009-0010 1700 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20552 Attention: OTS-2009-0010 Re: Proposed Amendments Regarding Community Reinvestment Dear Sir or Madam: 1The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) welcomes the opportunity to comment on this interagency proposal that would revise the rules implementing the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) based on provisions in the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA), enacted on August 14, 2008. Under the existing CRA regulations, education loans are evaluated as consumer loans. An institution’s consumer lending must be evaluated if consumer lending makes up a substantial majority of an institution’s business. 1The Independent Community ...

Informations

• Publié par: Unyu
• Nombre de lectures: 33
• Langue: English

Extrait

July 30, 2009

Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary

Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary

Attention: Comments

Board of Governors of the

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Federal Reserve System

550 17

th

Street, NW

20th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DC

20429

Washington, DC

20551

Attention: RIN number 3064-AD45

Attention: Docket No. R -1360

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

Regulation Comments,

250 E Street, SW, Mail Stop 2-3

Chief Counsel’s Office

Washington, DC

20219

Office of Thrift Supervision

Attention: Docket ID OCC-2009-0010

1700 G Street, NW

Washington, DC

20552

Attention: OTS-2009-0010

Re: Proposed Amendments Regarding Community Reinvestment

Dear Sir or Madam:

The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA)

1

welcomes the opportunity to

comment on this interagency proposal that would revise the rules implementing the

Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) based on provisions in the Higher Education

Opportunity Act (HEOA), enacted on August 14, 2008.

Under the existing CRA

regulations, education loans are evaluated as consumer loans.

An institution’s consumer

lending must be evaluated if consumer lending makes up a substantial majority of an

institution’s business.

1

The Independent Community Bankers of America represents nearly 5,000 community banks of all sizes and

charter types throughout the United States

and is dedicated exclusively to representing the interests of the

community banking industry and the communities and customers we serve. ICBA aggregates the power of its

members to provide a voice for community banking interests in Washington, resources to enhance community

bank education and marketability, and profitability options to help community banks compete in an ever-

changing marketplace.

With nearly 5,000 members, representing more than 20,000 locations nationwide and employing nearly

300,000 Americans, ICBA members hold $1 trillion in assets, $800 billion in deposits, and $700 billion in

loans to consumers, small businesses and the agricultural community. For more information, visit ICBA’s

website at www.icba.org.

2

Section 1031 of the HEOA revised the CRA to require the federal bank and thrift

regulatory agencies (collectively, the "Agencies") to consider low-cost education loans

that an institution provides to low-income borrowers when evaluating its record of

meeting community credit needs.

In accordance with the recently enacted HEOA, the

Agencies are proposing to implement regulations that would require them to consider, as

a factor, low-cost education loans provided to low-income borrowers in the bank’s

assessment area who have an individual income of less than 50% of the area median

income, when evaluating and rating a bank’s community reinvestment record.

The

proposal defines “low-cost education loans” as (1) education loans originated by a bank

through a Department of Education loan program or (2) any private education loan, as

defined in the Truth in Lending Act, including loans under a state or local education loan

program, originated by a bank for a student at an institution of higher education, with

interest rates and fees no greater than those of comparable education loans offered

through loan programs of the Department of Education.

ICBA understands and appreciates the intent of Congress and the Agencies to make

college more affordable to lower income individuals, especially in today’s economic

environment where attending college can seem like an unattainable goal.

Nevertheless,

we have strong concerns with this proposed rule because it would require community

banks to provide education loans when many of these institutions are not in the business

of providing such loan products to their customers.

Therefore, ICBA strongly urges the

Agencies to exempt small and intermediate small banks from this standard in their CRA

evaluation, or financial institutions that do not, in their normal course of business,

provide education loans to consumers.

Alternatively, the Agencies could also expressly

state in the regulation that financial institutions could receive positive consideration if

they provide low-cost education loans to low-income borrowers, but that no financial

institution’s CRA rating will be negatively impacted if it fails to provide such education

loans.

This proposed rule, as written, makes the assumption that all financial institutions provide

federal and/or private education loans, when in actuality, education loans are a niche

product that some, but not all, financial institutions specialize in.

In reality, many small

banks located in smaller communities do not provide these loan products to their

customers and are not set up to do so.

The financial institutions that specialize in

education lending are geared to do so, and many have secondary markets specifically set

up for this purpose.

For these financial institutions, which tend to be student loan

companies or large national banks, it makes practical sense to consider, as a factor, the

low-cost education loans they provide to low-income borrowers when assessing their

record of meeting community credit needs.

Furthermore, most community banks today are focused on a specific geographic area and

service the community's lending activities for that region only.

In many communities,

demand for higher education loans from small private lenders, such as community banks,

may be very limited.

The purpose of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) is to

encourage banks and savings associations to meet the credit needs of borrowers in their

communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.

Therefore,

community banks should not be required to expend resources that do not directly benefit

3

their local communities.

Performance context should always be carefully considered and

applied, and for that reason, the aforementioned exemption or clarification should be

included in the final rule.

Finally, in preparing the final rule, ICBA urges the Agencies be cognizant of the overall

regulatory burden that disproportionately impacts community banks and threatens their

continued viability.

Regulatory burden is one of the top concerns of community bankers

today, and the burden has been increased dramatically in recent years as Congress and the

regulators constantly impose new reporting, disclosure and compliance requirements.

These additional requirements place a heavy and unnecessary burden on community

banks that already are effective in meeting the needs of their communities, due to their

small structure and vested interest in the communities they serve.

ICBA appreciates the Agencies’ continued and ongoing attention to CRA and welcomes

the opportunity to continue working with the Agencies on streamlining the requirements

and eliminating unnecessary burdens.

If you have any questions about our letter or need

additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 202-659-8111 or by email

at

[e-mail]

.

Sincerely,

/s/

Elizabeth A. Eurgubian

Regulatory Counsel